Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Byte wrote:
Again, PJ Pants knew to ask(circuit regular, your words). Did his prior 3 opponents? Nobody cares. Sheep to the slaughter folks. Your money.

Yay! Fun! Fast and loose! We're all friends here!

Lipstick on a pig dude.

So since we're down to one particular uninvolved third-party hammering this particular dead horse for their own amusement completely devoid of context, I'll bite.

I've judged at both Adepticon and NOVA and numerous smaller regional events--I've both played at and been involved in running/judging games at the level of play being discussed here.

So I'm hopefully qualified to tell you why you're wrong, but first let's clarify a couple things:

 Byte wrote:
However, if this is the new normal/standard for Grand Tournaments endorsed by GW, NOVA and ITC, I get it.

This is not the "new" anything. This is how tournaments always have been run, and always will be run, as it's a concrete necessity of the game and the format. You don't understand why and are instead shouting about the bits that aren't perfect--nobody would argue that they are--and that's fine. I'm here to help.

 Byte wrote:
Just another good 'ol boys network. Check. I'll pass.

What a cute little means to imply that Nick's status as a known tournament player was the deciding factor in how this situation was handled, without actually saying it, since it's obviously untrue. This is exactly how this situation would be handled on table 202 between Little Timmy and Johnny Fluff, and anyone even remotely involved in the tournament scene knows that. Good thing that's out of the way.

So let's get to the heart of the situation--here's the quick-and-dirty as to how the judging situation works at a major 40k event:

The primary onus of ensuring your opponent plays correctly is on you. This one is bold because it's the most important one. It's the most important one because, unfortunately, 40k events cannot provide 250 trained judges to spectate each table and ensure the game is being played correctly. In my personal opinion, there's honestly about 10 people in the entire country qualified to perform judging at that level, were it actually required in the first place. But the game and the format do not allow for this to be the case even were it not entirely impossible from the outset.

Given that we've established that the primary responsibility for ensuring the game is played correctly is on the players themselves, what is the responsibility of the event?

The event is responsible for providing you the means to confirm and enforce the rules. If you say "hey, guy, I think you're doing that wrong" and he says "no I'm not" you've reached an impasse and it's time for the event to get involved. This is where judges come in (and, in an earlier fashion, FAQs/event format rulings) and are expected to provide coherent, consistent, and (when possible) correct rulings for players. But again--this can only occur once brought to their attention. The primary onus is still on the player to bring issues before the judges, as the ~10 staff members walking the halls at a major GT are not psychically aware of your rules dispute from across the hall. Once an issue has been brought to their attention, the issue should be resolved and the incorrect party should be forced to play correctly--anything less is a failure of the event or the judges, and these things do happen, but are certainly minimal by comparison to the number of issues brought up.

These two things are not up for debate--they are absolute truths, until trained high-level judges start growing on trees and major events find dumpsters full of cash to fly them out and pay them to do nothing but walk around and get yelled at all weekend.

So the only remaining issue is: what do we do when a rule is played incorrectly?

This is where you've taken your stand--insisting that, as a rule was incorrect, something must be done to teach someone a lesson lest we all devolve into madness and everyone openly cheats for their own benefit with nothing possibly being done to stop it.

The current situation plays out exactly as seen in the game being critiqued, and as I laid out above: the rule in question is corrected, and to be played correctly from then on.

But what about the other opponents from earlier rounds who were "cheated"? The primary responsibility was on them to question the rule during their game. Outside of physical, outright cheating (fixed dice, illegal lists, etc) a tournament is never going to alter a game result after the fact based on an incorrect rules play. This seems to be an enormous problem for some of you, so let's discuss why this is the case:

Currently, if your opponent misplays a rule, it's your responsibility to question it and notify a judge. That means if someone "cheats" you on a rule it is (in a way) "your fault," because the means were available to you to correct the situation, and you did not make use of them. That--as mentioned--is not a perfect situation. It sucks, and it happens at every tournament.

So let's flip the script and live in Byte's world for a moment where--as implied by prior comments--if you are found to have been playing a rule incorrectly, the game in which you did so (and any prior games) can retroactively be forfeited as a result.

Let's quickly make two things very, very clear:

99.99% of what you would refer to as "cheating" in the context being applied to the game in question is, obviously, not actually cheating. It's a player simply not playing a rule correctly by mistake. People get rules wrong all the time. Yes, even the top players. Ask them, because I make fun of them for it. Frequently.

The vast majority of the miniature wargaming community are great people, as evidenced by the fact that Mike was able to wring $60,000 out of them for charity even after they got done buying plastic men. However, a small handful of them are absolute dirtbags. You each know a couple of absolute dirtbags. They're out there, and some of them attend these events.

So what do you think happens when you, at a tournament policy-level, decide that misplaying a rule incorrectly is grounds for immediate disqualification? Aside from making the game into a paranoid nightmare, what is the primary fallout here?

Let's quickly combine those two facts above. What happens when Little Timmy accidentally thinks his Heavy Bolter is S6 against your local Absolute Dirtbag? Do you think Absolute Dirtbag is going to bring it to his attention for the good of the community?

No. You just disqualified Little Timmy. Congratulations.

By swapping the onus for correct play from the opponent to the players themselves (at threat of serious penalty), you immediately turn this game into an absolute trashfest. None of the games will be fun, because everyone is so scared of getting something wrong. The people who benefit the most are the people who are most willing to abuse minor mistakes to their benefit.

Now, there's obviously a counterpoint to this (because as mentioned, it's not a perfect system)--you can easily say the current situation allows the Absolute Dirtbag to intentionally misplay rules to his benefit until caught without penalty. That's unfortunately true, to a point--but even in a vacuum, that's a far better outcome than "gotcha!" disqualifications for any misplay. If you think otherwise, you must think you've been playing rules-flawless games of 40k, and I can assure you that you haven't. The worst-case in our current environment is that an Absolute Dirtbag gets to walk over a couple people until he runs into someone who knows better, but those people on the way had the opportunity and resources available to correct the misplays, and will know better in the future. The worst-case scenario in your environment is that misplays are intentionally ignored and later sprung upon lower-tier players for free wins.

In practice, there's much more going on here, because we know the vast majority of the Absolute Dirtbags of the wargaming community. Specific care is taken regarding people who are known problems, or who have a few too many rules corrected over the course of an event. These aren't the sort of things that can be written into tournament policy (as they're very case-by-case), but they're a real factor, and acted upon as necessary.

Now that the context for the decisions being made the way they are has been made clear, feel free to provide any insightful constructive thoughts on how you think that major events should change things for the betterment of the community without absolutely annihilating the game itself (and Little Timmy along with it), instead of just shouting and throwing garbage about how one tiny moment of one particular game (which bothered neither of the actual players in the slightest) was effectively a war crime.

Thank you DJ3 for elaborating my point much better than I was able to.

First, of all, I did not say what I thought should happen until someone falsely stated I did, and it had nothing to do with banning. No prize and apologize to his previous opponents. No one said he should be banned that I saw. Second, you make it sound like this was between two fluff players and try to completely down play the competitive nature of these events. I know PJ pants and have played him; he is there to win having fun is secondary, that is fine, but don’t try to twist the competitive nature of these into some fluffy free for all to make your argument. People know what they are, and that is fine, there is nothing wrong with competitive events, I play in them too. The point you and others are trying to make is that it is on the opponent to catch someone playing wrong, but you completely make everything you said in your post meaningless with this statement

there's honestly about 10 people in the entire country qualified to perform judging at that level

. How can you think there are only ten judges that can possibly know all the rules but you expect the players too, and they should be able to catch every mistake, if not it's their fault? Yes it is up to the players to know their rules and you admit it's impossible for some one to know them all. So, you should at the very least know your rules for your army. That is what people are saying. It is nothing against the event, have never made but I only hear good things. It is nothing against judges, I would never want to do it. People just don't agree that it is OK for a top player to not know his own rules, and when called on it did not have the source materials availible. You can victim blame all you want but you will never get me or anyone else in this discussion to say that was not wrong. Know your rules and have them with you, isn't that a requirement of any tournament?

DJ's comments are excellent.

The worst thing about tournaments are the condescending/presumptive trolls who don't go to tournaments.

MVBrandt wrote:
DJ's comments are excellent.

The worst thing about tournaments are the condescending/presumptive trolls who don't go to tournaments.

Actually your comments have been more condescending then most. In fact most of this debate was cause by your initial response which basically amounted to "You didn't attend? so off with your concerns..." which is a poor way to handle something like this. Myself and others have not blown this into any sort of major issue beyond stating it should at the very least be taken seriously and looked into. It's cheap and easy to just call us all the same mob though.

Players should know their own rules and despite that mistakes sill still happen but for me the most insane thing is him not having any of the needed rules to play with him. Hand wave that all you want, that is and has been a requirement of even the most laid back RTT since the games been out. You know something is off when a player actually asks a judge off table for a source he is supposed to have.

 Red Corsair wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
DJ's comments are excellent.

The worst thing about tournaments are the condescending/presumptive trolls who don't go to tournaments.

Actually your comments have been more condescending then most. In fact most of this debate was cause by your initial response which basically amounted to "You didn't attend? so off with your concerns..." which is a poor way to handle something like this. Myself and others have not blown this into any sort of major issue beyond stating it should at the very least be taken seriously and looked into. It's cheap and easy to just call us all the same mob though.

Players should know their own rules and despite that mistakes sill still happen but for me the most insane thing is him not having any of the needed rules to play with him. Hand wave that all you want, that is and has been a requirement of even the most laid back RTT since the games been out. You know something is off when a player actually asks a judge off table for a source he is supposed to have.

They have been. People pay far too much attention to the top table, and far too much attention to people making honest mistakes in events where their primary reason for being there is *not* "winning the tournament." I'm looking down my nose a bit because peanut gallery snipers who carp for multiple pages of thread on minor rules gaffes by the smallest % of players (the "top" guys) at massive events are a persistent problem in the hobby which often keeps interested passers-by from trying out what amounts to a giant gaming party for charity all weekend long. I *definitely* do not think all that highly of those who make too big a deal of what happens on the top tables. IDK what else to tell you. It is DEFINITELY hand wavey on my part; this issue is so comparatively irrelevant that I'm not exactly pleased with how much conversational space it's taken up. "I'm gonna do this thing." You're doing it wrong. "Oh, ok, I'll stop."

The worst thing about tournaments are the condescending/presumptive trolls who don't go to tournaments.

I do play at tournaments, I even have an overall trophy from a GW GT and best Team Theme from Adepticon, Real professional, stay classy.

So just to recap, there is no expectation the players in your tournament should know the rules for the army they are playing or have the source material available if a question arises, and if we disagree with that you resort to name calling.

Once again stay classy.

 ChainswordHeretic wrote:

The worst thing about tournaments are the condescending/presumptive trolls who don't go to tournaments.

I do play at tournaments, I even have an overall trophy from a GW GT and best Team Theme from Adepticon, Real professional, stay classy.

So just to recap, there is no expectation the players in your tournament should know the rules for the army they are playing or have the source material available if a question arises, and if we disagree with that you resort to name calling.

Once again stay classy.

I'm not presently trying to be classy. The expectation is the players who attend should know the rules and have the source material. If the question comes up and they don't, we talk to them, penalize if needed, and move along. This happened across the board. In this case, the mistake was honest and no penalty was needed. It also didn't impact the game. I'm glad you play at tournaments, and that you have an overall trophy, though once again winning a tournament means about as much to a tournament organizer as farting - you aren't the person the event is aimed at. Neither is Nick Nanavati. Maintaining a moderate approach to course corrections instead of penalties and forfeits at every error is vital to populating large events with a broad range of people there to have a good time. Applying harsh penalties to "good" players only is untenable, and I'm not about to go hunting down the mid-crowders and interrupting their fun to active judge every error they've made, identified, and corrected during play in order to penalize them. There's nothing logically actionable being suggested.

PS - Nick asking a judge what the rule was on the stream doesn't indicate he doesn't have the material to a guy who is busy supporting 212 attendees. People across the board ask rules they could look up all day long.

A condescending troll? Peanut galley sniper? Wow.

Unexpected.

So I get labeled and flamed for pointing out a rule violation that (read slowly) may have mattered in his 3 prior games.

Your dismissive responses are annoying. Noted.

 Byte wrote:
A condescending troll? Peanut galley sniper? Wow.

Unexpected.

So I get labeled and flamed for pointing out a rule violation that (read slowly) may have mattered in his 3 prior games.

Your dismissive responses are annoying. Noted.

You went above and beyond merely pointing it out. If you had merely said: "hey, could this misinterpretation have affected earlier rounds?" Then the answer would be "Yup." And then we would have moved along.

So let's flip the script and live in Byte's world for a moment where--as implied by prior comments--if you are found to have been playing a rule incorrectly, the game in which you did so (and any prior games) can retroactively be forfeited as a result.

Let's quickly make two things very, very clear:

99.99% of what you would refer to as "cheating" in the context being applied to the game in question is, obviously, not actually cheating. It's a player simply not playing a rule correctly by mistake. People get rules wrong all the time. Yes, even the top players. Ask them, because I make fun of them for it. Frequently.

Reading comprehension.

I never said cheating.
I never said games should be forfeit.

Your making things up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Byte wrote:
A condescending troll? Peanut galley sniper? Wow.

Unexpected.

So I get labeled and flamed for pointing out a rule violation that (read slowly) may have mattered in his 3 prior games.

Your dismissive responses are annoying. Noted.

You went above and beyond merely pointing it out. If you had merely said: "hey, could this misinterpretation have affected earlier rounds?" Then the answer would be "Yup." And then we would have moved along.

I did do that. The response was, "go away, you werent there'. Go back and read through.

Thank you Nick, that is the response I expected, and I am your target audience. I stopped playing competitive years ago and shoot for painting and batting .500 when I play. I get it is a thankless job and I at no point up until my last post did I attribute any blame on your tournament. What I was arguing, was people saying there is no responsibility on the player that was incorrect, and it is up to their opponent to catch them, and you confirmed that is not the case in your eyes. The only thing I would like to see in these situations is to get all of the opponents involved, let them know what happened, see if it effected them, and let the guy apologize. I little humble pie goes along way, I think the opponent's will appreciate it, and I think most of them will say no big deal. I would shoot for making everyone that was potentially involved happy instead of just the two guys in the current match, but I do understand sometimes that might not be feasible.

P.S. I did not watch the stream, I was going by what other people said, but if he did indeed have his material I apologize that is an accusation not to be taken lightly.

He didn't have the reference, he asked his opponent if he had the book. Just smoke and mirror bs. Like kids with chocolate figures claimng not to have gotten in the cookie jar.

Im not making this up. Its all clear as day.

There is no humble pie. Just elitists.

Its really is a damn shame. I guess "NOVA" is a community in itself. Not part of the gaming scene at large. Ok.

 Byte wrote:


Its really is a damn shame. I guess "NOVA" is a community in itself. Not part of the gaming scene at large. Ok.

A community made better by your absence.

Forsaken_Poptart wrote:

 Byte wrote:


Its really is a damn shame. I guess "NOVA" is a community in itself. Not part of the gaming scene at large. Ok.

A community made better by your absence.

Because not knowing your own rules at a GT is good!

Really?

DJ3 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Byte wrote:
Again, PJ Pants knew to ask(circuit regular, your words). Did his prior 3 opponents? Nobody cares. Sheep to the slaughter folks. Your money.

Yay! Fun! Fast and loose! We're all friends here!

Lipstick on a pig dude.

So since we're down to one particular uninvolved third-party hammering this particular dead horse for their own amusement completely devoid of context, I'll bite.

I've judged at both Adepticon and NOVA and numerous smaller regional events--I've both played at and been involved in running/judging games at the level of play being discussed here.

So I'm hopefully qualified to tell you why you're wrong, but first let's clarify a couple things:

 Byte wrote:
However, if this is the new normal/standard for Grand Tournaments endorsed by GW, NOVA and ITC, I get it.

This is not the "new" anything. This is how tournaments always have been run, and always will be run, as it's a concrete necessity of the game and the format. You don't understand why and are instead shouting about the bits that aren't perfect--nobody would argue that they are--and that's fine. I'm here to help.

 Byte wrote:
Just another good 'ol boys network. Check. I'll pass.

What a cute little means to imply that Nick's status as a known tournament player was the deciding factor in how this situation was handled, without actually saying it, since it's obviously untrue. This is exactly how this situation would be handled on table 202 between Little Timmy and Johnny Fluff, and anyone even remotely involved in the tournament scene knows that. Good thing that's out of the way.

So let's get to the heart of the situation--here's the quick-and-dirty as to how the judging situation works at a major 40k event:

The primary onus of ensuring your opponent plays correctly is on you. This one is bold because it's the most important one. It's the most important one because, unfortunately, 40k events cannot provide 250 trained judges to spectate each table and ensure the game is being played correctly. In my personal opinion, there's honestly about 10 people in the entire country qualified to perform judging at that level, were it actually required in the first place. But the game and the format do not allow for this to be the case even were it not entirely impossible from the outset.

Given that we've established that the primary responsibility for ensuring the game is played correctly is on the players themselves, what is the responsibility of the event?

The event is responsible for providing you the means to confirm and enforce the rules. If you say "hey, guy, I think you're doing that wrong" and he says "no I'm not" you've reached an impasse and it's time for the event to get involved. This is where judges come in (and, in an earlier fashion, FAQs/event format rulings) and are expected to provide coherent, consistent, and (when possible) correct rulings for players. But again--this can only occur once brought to their attention. The primary onus is still on the player to bring issues before the judges, as the ~10 staff members walking the halls at a major GT are not psychically aware of your rules dispute from across the hall. Once an issue has been brought to their attention, the issue should be resolved and the incorrect party should be forced to play correctly--anything less is a failure of the event or the judges, and these things do happen, but are certainly minimal by comparison to the number of issues brought up.

These two things are not up for debate--they are absolute truths, until trained high-level judges start growing on trees and major events find dumpsters full of cash to fly them out and pay them to do nothing but walk around and get yelled at all weekend.

So the only remaining issue is: what do we do when a rule is played incorrectly?

This is where you've taken your stand--insisting that, as a rule was incorrect, something must be done to teach someone a lesson lest we all devolve into madness and everyone openly cheats for their own benefit with nothing possibly being done to stop it.

The current situation plays out exactly as seen in the game being critiqued, and as I laid out above: the rule in question is corrected, and to be played correctly from then on.

But what about the other opponents from earlier rounds who were "cheated"? The primary responsibility was on them to question the rule during their game. Outside of physical, outright cheating (fixed dice, illegal lists, etc) a tournament is never going to alter a game result after the fact based on an incorrect rules play. This seems to be an enormous problem for some of you, so let's discuss why this is the case:

Currently, if your opponent misplays a rule, it's your responsibility to question it and notify a judge. That means if someone "cheats" you on a rule it is (in a way) "your fault," because the means were available to you to correct the situation, and you did not make use of them. That--as mentioned--is not a perfect situation. It sucks, and it happens at every tournament.

So let's flip the script and live in Byte's world for a moment where--as implied by prior comments--if you are found to have been playing a rule incorrectly, the game in which you did so (and any prior games) can retroactively be forfeited as a result.

Let's quickly make two things very, very clear:

99.99% of what you would refer to as "cheating" in the context being applied to the game in question is, obviously, not actually cheating. It's a player simply not playing a rule correctly by mistake. People get rules wrong all the time. Yes, even the top players. Ask them, because I make fun of them for it. Frequently.

The vast majority of the miniature wargaming community are great people, as evidenced by the fact that Mike was able to wring $60,000 out of them for charity even after they got done buying plastic men. However, a small handful of them are absolute dirtbags. You each know a couple of absolute dirtbags. They're out there, and some of them attend these events.

So what do you think happens when you, at a tournament policy-level, decide that misplaying a rule incorrectly is grounds for immediate disqualification? Aside from making the game into a paranoid nightmare, what is the primary fallout here?

Let's quickly combine those two facts above. What happens when Little Timmy accidentally thinks his Heavy Bolter is S6 against your local Absolute Dirtbag? Do you think Absolute Dirtbag is going to bring it to his attention for the good of the community?

No. You just disqualified Little Timmy. Congratulations.

By swapping the onus for correct play from the opponent to the players themselves (at threat of serious penalty), you immediately turn this game into an absolute trashfest. None of the games will be fun, because everyone is so scared of getting something wrong. The people who benefit the most are the people who are most willing to abuse minor mistakes to their benefit.

Now, there's obviously a counterpoint to this (because as mentioned, it's not a perfect system)--you can easily say the current situation allows the Absolute Dirtbag to intentionally misplay rules to his benefit until caught without penalty. That's unfortunately true, to a point--but even in a vacuum, that's a far better outcome than "gotcha!" disqualifications for any misplay. If you think otherwise, you must think you've been playing rules-flawless games of 40k, and I can assure you that you haven't. The worst-case in our current environment is that an Absolute Dirtbag gets to walk over a couple people until he runs into someone who knows better, but those people on the way had the opportunity and resources available to correct the misplays, and will know better in the future. The worst-case scenario in your environment is that misplays are intentionally ignored and later sprung upon lower-tier players for free wins.

In practice, there's much more going on here, because we know the vast majority of the Absolute Dirtbags of the wargaming community. Specific care is taken regarding people who are known problems, or who have a few too many rules corrected over the course of an event. These aren't the sort of things that can be written into tournament policy (as they're very case-by-case), but they're a real factor, and acted upon as necessary.

Now that the context for the decisions being made the way they are has been made clear, feel free to provide any insightful constructive thoughts on how you think that major events should change things for the betterment of the community without absolutely annihilating the game itself (and Little Timmy along with it), instead of just shouting and throwing garbage about how one tiny moment of one particular game (which bothered neither of the actual players in the slightest) was effectively a war crime.

Are you an auditor or something in your working life?
That was incredibly well written.
Going through the steps of a system and how enforcement is maintained in a reasonable way was well outlined.

I agree as well it sucks at first needing to know the opposing army rules but honestly, if you like competition you are already trying to do that.
8th is a good time so-far since all the indexes are out and we are into out 3rd codex so-far so we have it "easy".

I have seen too many people who are quite enamored in "punishment" needing to be handed out.
It is more a matter of "compliance".
Not following a rule? Find rule, identify what is supposed to happen: all is good.

It is a valid consideration when in competitive play to understand the tournament rules and factor them in (leverage) as appropriate.
We are trying to have a game where a win has some measurable merit to it.
Gaining an auto-win by abusing the tournament rules would devalue the entire event if not the game.

 ChainswordHeretic wrote:
Thank you Nick, that is the response I expected, and I am your target audience. I stopped playing competitive years ago and shoot for painting and batting .500 when I play. I get it is a thankless job and I at no point up until my last post did I attribute any blame on your tournament. What I was arguing, was people saying there is no responsibility on the player that was incorrect, and it is up to their opponent to catch them, and you confirmed that is not the case in your eyes. The only thing I would like to see in these situations is to get all of the opponents involved, let them know what happened, see if it effected them, and let the guy apologize. I little humble pie goes along way, I think the opponent's will appreciate it, and I think most of them will say no big deal. I would shoot for making everyone that was potentially involved happy instead of just the two guys in the current match, but I do understand sometimes that might not be feasible.

P.S. I did not watch the stream, I was going by what other people said, but if he did indeed have his material I apologize that is an accusation not to be taken lightly.

The issue with getting all previous opponents involved is do we do that only for top players or for anyone that has made a mistake on a rule. I played a guy years ago in round 4 at a GT we were both 1-2, he was playing several rules incorrectly I assume all day. Should he be taken by TOs back to all his opponents and made to apologize? Or is it only relevant when someone is winning? That is the problem put up with those kinds of solutions, it is one thing if someone is hard cheating (fixed dice, not removing models etc.), but rules mistakes to me don't deserve extra shaming, and conversations like this basically ensure that top players will never want to play streamed games at tournaments in case they make a mistake (as every other game where mistakes were made don't get made public, and there are a ton) If he did not have the rules I view that as an issue. Of course players should strive to get their rules right (no one is saying otherwise), but there is no fitting punishment for mistakes that will not end up making the tournament environment worse for those participating, because unless the idea is "only top players should be held to this standard." we end up with a lot of people on bottom tables needing to spend time apologizing and judges walking people around the hall to find opponents to apologize to. And if only top players are held to this standard, it is a strange double standard. Also those of us saying the opposing players need to take initiative to ask about rules realize that this is the only way mistakes get avoided, or that people abusing rules get caught.

Lets use this example

Nick is playing the stratagem in question wrong in his games. His first opponent questions him, and the rules are determined to be wrong, for the rest of that game he is forced to play the rules correctly. In the case he doesn't have the rules, or things are unclear and a judge is called, the judge makes the rules call and the correct rules are enforced.

If in game 2 he returns to playing the rule wrong and his opponent calls it out, if a judge was involved the first time, guess that would be cheating caught. If knowing he was wrong game 1 and it was an honest mistake, he doesn't make it again, and future problems are avoided.

You need to start with the assumption that the rules are getting played wrong, and then determine that people questioning rules is the only way this ever gets solved in the first place.

It seems like a lot of people are saying, he should never play rules wrong in the first place. Sure in an ideal world that is the case, but it isn't reality, and if no one questions the rules, then no one ever finds out that the mistake was made in the first place.

As far as I'm concerned all this has been a look behind the curtain.

It is ugly.

 Byte wrote:
As far as I'm concerned all this has been a look behind the curtain.

It is ugly.

How would you make it better?

I think that's all anyone is asking for - no one wants everything to be awful. But there are certain things you cannot do, as D3J mentioned. So tell me how you'd improve the system, what you'd do if you caught someone making a mistake like that as a tournament TO.

Also those of us saying the opposing players need to take initiative to ask about rules realize that this is the only way mistakes get avoided, or that people abusing rules get caught.

Second part true, the first part no. Another way for mistakes to be avoided is to know the rules and play them correctly. I should be able to go to an organized event with the expectation I will be playing people with their rules available and that know how to play their army. Thinking I should go there with the expectation that I have to police my games to make sure I am not being cheated is bull. And where did anyone say only top players should be held to a certain standard. Bottom line it is a judgment call, except for what you call hard cheaters, loaded dice GTFO. For other things? pick up an extra dice when rolling for your heavy bolter a gentle please pay more attention to what your doing, Fine. This is described as an extra attack for Khorne Berserkers without the reference books when questioned, That is a lot bigger issue. Yes at that point I do think the other people he played should have been aware of the situation because ultimately it has the potential to affect their enjoyment for something they paid a lot of money to be a part of.

It seems like a lot of people are saying, he should never play rules wrong in the first place. Sure in an ideal world that is the case, but it isn't reality, and if no one questions the rules, then no one ever finds out that the mistake was made in the first place

That is were we disagree, yes no one is perfect, but the standard should be we try to know our rules and play correctly. You seem to think we should play it, that we can't trust anyone we're playing, and should watch them like a hawk. I don't see how that would be fun for anyone playing with that attitude?

 ChainswordHeretic wrote:

The worst thing about tournaments are the condescending/presumptive trolls who don't go to tournaments.

So just to recap, there is no expectation the players in your tournament should know the rules for the army they are playing or have the source material available if a question arises, and if we disagree with that you resort to name calling.

Yes.

As demonstrated in this thread since the "topic" was brought up.

Ideally for everyone... cheating or consistently breaking the rules in your favor is the same on every table.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Byte wrote:
As far as I'm concerned all this has been a look behind the curtain.

It is ugly.

How would you make it better?

I think that's all anyone is asking for - no one wants everything to be awful. But there are certain things you cannot do, as D3J mentioned. So tell me how you'd improve the system, what you'd do if you caught someone making a mistake like that as a tournament TO.

Not sure the target audience really cares what I have to say on the matter as I'm just a no show troll. But in order to avoid being rude Ill submit an answer.

Nothing can be done with NOVA in its current meta as long as its supposed to be a brofisting, backslapping evolution as proclaimed by its TO as a "non-competitive event".

For those events that may consider themselves competitive where everybody doesn't get a ribbon, I'm of the mind set of the following.

1. Have hard copy of army lists for your opponents(we all know this doesn't happen)
2. Have army reference material in any authorized form(")

3. Add a 5pt max rules score for each player for each match. Not sportsmen. "Rules Acumen". This is not a secret score. Its discussed openly by each player at end of game. no list -1, no references -1, etc. If there's a dispute. Call over a judge. work it out. If I'm teaching you the game -5!

Here's the hard part. Its also a self evaluation. I played amateur competitive golf so that may contribute as to why my expectations are higher than some. Golf is a self penalizing sport. The "final score card" isn't signed until the end of the match(tournament). So a player can and should dock themselves even if the opponent or judge cant agree/overlook. Integrity should go a long way.

So a grievous "mistake" can be back tracked and docked from the "Rules Acumen" score.

So if the "king ding-a-ling" goes from first to worst, so be it. None of the pairings changed. Still the final group(table). Just like golf. (If there was a post play penalty for some reason, like 3 players coming forward and saying they got face raped by zerks 3 times in a charge, or something like that)

There you asked.

Wow, everyone seems to be having a crabby hangover today.

Anyway, it seems like adding a whole new positive score might be complicated. Could just start at 0 and deduct 2 points for no list, 2 points for not bringing all your rules, e.t.c. If you try to deduct for lots of questions asked and stuff, however, you're just gonna bog things down and cause lots of fights. Keep it easy, keep it 3rd party verifiable.

If it's found out after the match that you played rules wrong we follow the same idea. Just deduct 50% of the offending player's score for placing and matchmaking purposes for each of those matches. Might change the winner, might not, but it's a simple and uniform solution.

 Byte wrote:
For those events that may consider themselves competitive where everybody doesn't get a ribbon, I'm of the mind set of the following.
1. Have hard copy of army lists for your opponents(we all know this doesn't happen)
2. Have army reference material in any authorized form(")
3. Add a 5pt max rules score for each player for each match. Not sportsmen. "Rules Acumen". This is not a secret score. Its discussed openly by each player at end of game. no list -1, no references -1, etc. If there's a dispute. Call over a judge. work it out. If I'm teaching you the game -5!

<snip>

So a grievous "mistake" can be back tracked and docked from the "Rules Acumen" score.

Good to throw that out there.

#1 I see a fair bit in tournament rules of providing a copy of your army list. to your opponent.
It only makes sense so they can see what you have and cannot claim being surprised and it does not hurt to show the points cost reasoning.
It also prevents any magic pencil changes during the course of a game. (Yeah, the holstered side arm is a PLASMA pistol... honest.)

I remember some guy making fun of me when I handed him my army list for a Hardboyz tournament way back when.
He asked for it later when I was beating the heck out of him in the game.
I also make a point of not pulling out my models till I see the actual hard copy committed (some people keep a few lists and select one once they see your list).

#2 That is just plain playing the game.
You need all the rules in front of you available for reference: you cannot remember it all.
Asking people to provide material or look up stuff for you is just plain not respecting other people's time.

#3 Unfortunately multiple rules would have to be made and applied as a "guide" for scoring on "Accumen".
- Knows game rules and his army rules and stats cold, knows squat about my army = 3/5.
- Tried to apply multiple times 7th edition rules to the game but did "OK" = 3/5.
- Thought the Heavy Bolters were strength 6 and had lots of them = 2/5(??)
- Guy was a pain in the rear questioning everything I did and requiring me to look the rules up and "Prove it" = 0/5.
- Guy kept doing questionable things, I kept telling him to "prove it" and look it up and he told me to "look it up yourself!" = 0/5.

I have seen so many "rose color glasses" views of rules it is weird when you have to spell-out the RAW meaning to them and this strange mix of "OH! Ok! OMG!" goes across their face.
I see that though and they are good in my books.

Why do you keep feeding this troll, just by his comments alone you should know that he does not care what you think. In his mind he has already decided how this works and looks and nothing said will convince him otherwise. Again you were NOT there, you are entitled to your opinion but that is all it is just like a butt hole everyone has one. But to drag on for 7 pages and cry about how your opinion is right is just sad. Go play in your small pond and enjoy your games, being an internet/40k forums troll is never going to provide you with what you really need.

Thousands of people had a good time and thanks to MVbrandt for actually doing the work with all the others that helped to make this a great event.

Amazes me even in my small pond when I run across people that have to argue every little thing, harmless mistake or otherwise when playing 40k. Even with travel, Prize support, hotels and event costs... you choose to play and deal with the good and bad of playing in events. Oh wait you don't play events... you just whine on the internet.

 Cult of My Boy Blue wrote:
Why do you keep feeding this troll, just by his comments alone you should know that he does not care what you think. In his mind he has already decided how this works and looks and nothing said will convince him otherwise. Again you were NOT there, you are entitled to your opinion but that is all it is just like a butt hole everyone has one. But to drag on for 7 pages and cry about how your opinion is right is just sad. Go play in your small pond and enjoy your games, being an internet/40k forums troll is never going to provide you with what you really need.

Thousands of people had a good time and thanks to MVbrandt for actually doing the work with all the others that helped to make this a great event.

Amazes me even in my small pond when I run across people that have to argue every little thing, harmless mistake or otherwise when playing 40k. Even with travel, Prize support, hotels and event costs... you choose to play and deal with the good and bad of playing in events. Oh wait you don't play events... you just whine on the internet.

I was answering a question tough guy. For you to be an enabler for those that play fast and loose does say a lot about yourself. Particularly those at events.

Group think. Echo chamber.

Its like folks are so blinded by the "hype/inclusion" that everything is untouchable. I'm not going to back down from calling things as a see it. Call me a troll if you wish. I'm certainly not a lemming.

The Open winning list was illegal as well. Is that not true? Or just a little untrue?

 Cult of My Boy Blue wrote:
Why do you keep feeding this troll, just by his comments alone you should know that he does not care what you think. In his mind he has already decided how this works and looks and nothing said will convince him otherwise.

Agreed. DJ3 already explained in a civil and detailed manner why he was wrong, and he could only ignore it. Don't take the bait, just let him declare victory while you talk about the actual event.

 Byte wrote:

 Cult of My Boy Blue wrote:
Why do you keep feeding this troll, just by his comments alone you should know that he does not care what you think. In his mind he has already decided how this works and looks and nothing said will convince him otherwise. Again you were NOT there, you are entitled to your opinion but that is all it is just like a butt hole everyone has one. But to drag on for 7 pages and cry about how your opinion is right is just sad. Go play in your small pond and enjoy your games, being an internet/40k forums troll is never going to provide you with what you really need.

Thousands of people had a good time and thanks to MVbrandt for actually doing the work with all the others that helped to make this a great event.

Amazes me even in my small pond when I run across people that have to argue every little thing, harmless mistake or otherwise when playing 40k. Even with travel, Prize support, hotels and event costs... you choose to play and deal with the good and bad of playing in events. Oh wait you don't play events... you just whine on the internet.

I was answering a question tough guy. For you to be an enabler for those that play fast and loose does say a lot about yourself. Particularly those at events.

Group think. Echo chamber.

Its like folks are so blinded by the "hype/inclusion" that everything is untouchable. I'm not going to back down from calling things as a see it. Call me a troll if you wish. I'm certainly not a lemming.

The Open winning list was illegal as well. Is that not true? Or just a little untrue?

My point is made each time you reply "tough guy". You are not a lemming, I would love to go into detail what you truly are but why give you the time. Good luck to you sir, I hope I never have to play you and listen to you tell me how important your opinion is.

Back to the event did anyone happen to see any great lists that may be meta changing?

And one last shout out to MVbrandt - you sir are a pretty awesome guy! Thanks for your hard work and contributions to the hobby! It shows!

A lot of people knew going into this event conscripts with indirect fire is winner... so this was just a confirmation of the existing meta.